Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: lazs2 on July 02, 2004, 09:57:16 AM
-
"I'm here to tell you: I'd rather lose votes than lose lives. I never want us to be the party of the NRA."
-Senator John Kerry "
-
Originally posted by lazs2
"I'm here to tell you: I'd rather lose votes than lose lives. I never want us to be the party of the NRA."
-Senator John Kerry "
He actually said this (a link?), or you just stirring the watermelon pot. I own a handgun.
Karaya
-
I call that integrety :)
-
Yes he did say that. you can go to gunblast.com to see it. they have a banner with a new kerry anti gun quote about every week.
kerry has made lots of anti gun comments.. I have posted several on this board when people have claimed that he never has.
by contrast... Bush's appointee for government lands has opened more than 100 places on federal land for people to shoot recreationally. She (yes she) also believes that our hunter and fishermen in this country are the nations most valuable asset to wilderness and conservation.
lazs
-
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1202b.html
2003.12.02
"We need the courage to stand up for gun safety. Some Democrats are saying that the only way to win elections is to throw out what we believe in. I’m here to tell you: I’d rather lose votes than lose lives. I never want us to be the party of the NRA."
-
Welcome to the sit and spin of the RW..gun safety = ban on guns.
Looks to me like the gun toters are mooching off the federal government to play a little weekend warrior. if they want to shoot, let them shoot on their own land. I have 40+ acres and it seems to fit me rather nicely. :D
-
Kerry is anti gun?
He should be shot.
:p
-
You have to have 50 acres to shoot guns on in Texas, and not too many have 50 acres laying around to use as a range.
-
Originally posted by Curval
Kerry is anti gun?
He should be shot.
:p
Beat me to it (although my version would have been much more funny (or is it funnier?))
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
if they want to shoot, let them shoot on their own land. I have 40+ acres and it seems to fit me rather nicely. :D
Must be nice!
-
The NRA is about protecting the Second, and more recently, the First Amendment of our Constitution (ref: McCain-Feingold S.27) From the article---
"Campaign finance reform is not about big dollars influencing elections. It's not about crooked politicians and a tainted process. It's not about corruption. It's not about untoward influence. It's not about fixing a broken system."
"It is about who will control information to the electorate. It is about the big media and incumbent politicians having a total lock on speech, ideas and political thought in America. It is about a television/radio blackout of truth, opinions and beliefs of individual Americans who pool their power by choosing to belong to organizations like the NRA--organizations that give them the collective clout they need to reach millions of voters through paid issue advocacy."
"In short, campaign finance reform as proposed could put the NRA out of business when it comes to influencing federal elections and public policy. If NRA cannot be your voice in politics, then open season on the Second Amendment will follow."
The Letter Of The Law
"The truth in understanding any legislation is not in what the mainstream media claim, nor is it even in what its proponents claim. The truth is in the black letter of the law--and what the law really does."
"After 11 days of debate, with scores of amendments considered and many accepted, the black letter of the McCain-Feingold Act demands:
That all violations of the legislation are criminal offenses calling for federal prison sentences and steep fines. Such violations in S. 27 run the gamut from numerous possible filing and paperwork errors, to placing television and radio "issue" advertisements that don't meet a government standard, to having normal lobbying discussions construed as illegal campaign "coordination" activities. Any of these could mean prison terms for officials of organizations like the NRA and their employees simply for attempting to exercise the group's collective First Amendment rights.
A ban on broadcast, cable, or satellite television and radio issue advertising by groups like the NRA. The electronic media blackout would be enforced 60 days before a general election and 30 days before a primary election (or runoff) if the government determined that the advertising content "refers" to a federal candidate.
Massive reporting and notification of "disbursements" and "expenditures" by lobbying organizations such as the NRA. This requirement is so burdensome that during a hot political year, thousands of reports would have to be filed--literally by the minute, on the minute. For some issue organizations, the reporting requirements alone could be impossible to meet. Again, there is criminal liability for employees of such issue organizations who fail to prepare accurate reports on exacting deadlines.
Meeting legal hurdles under the guise of avoiding "coordination" with candidates for organizations using corporate or member-donated funds. These new hurdles would make "independent expenditures" all-but-impossible--effectively killing the real power in grassroots political campaigns. If the government were to declare that door-to-door campaigning, phone banks, get-out-the-vote rallies or even posting yard signs were even vaguely "coordinated" with a candidate or political party, these activities could be declared illegal, making such expenditures subject to criminal prosecution.
These are just some of the more egregious parts of the legislation in terms of shutting you and the grassroots lobby groups you support out of the electoral and political processes."
Here's the whole article.
McCain-Feingold S.27 (http://www.nraila.org/media/misc/muzzle.htm)
I can't believe the First Amendment folks in here have missed this. But it's not their fault, the media doesn't want anyone to know about it. Seems the NRA is doing its part trying to defend it. After all, and especially in the case of the NRA, lobby groups are the collective voice of many. You and me, the average guys whose only "special interest" is freedom.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The NRA is not about guns, it's about freedom.
Here's a link concerning John Kerry's stance on freedom and your constitutional rights:
http://www.nraila.org/issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=136
-
I didn't miss it Leslie and posted a link on it a couple of weeks ago.
-
I remember that AKIron.
Les
-
I always thought campaign reform was or should be about limiting those running for office, not everyone else. What was I thinking? :confused: :rolleyes:
-
red tail... please tell me what laws we have right now or laws that the NRA oppossed that will save lives.
The NRA is the preimier group that protects your gun rights There is nothing they support that is not to the benifiet of gun owners and people in general.
as for federal land... let me see if I get you right.. you oppose opening up land that is owned by and paid for by the people who pay taxes for them to use? Who do you think pays the most for federal lands?
Also... most of the guns you own are ones that kerry feels you don't need. he has been seen with the brady bunch (formerly hangun control inc.) and claims he supports them... They would like a ban on all handguns.. they would like a ban on all repeating shotguns and all semi auto rifles. You would be left with the .308
but then... you pretty much vote with the party of panderers tho anyway right?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
if they want to shoot, let them shoot on their own land.
Dang Straight!
And those water skiers! If they want to ski, let them build their own dang resevoir!
Not to mention those CAMPERS! AND HIKERS! Man, they litter up EVERYTHING and damage the trails in the frail ecosystem. Let 'em sleep in their backyard and hike around the fenced-in part.
Don't even get me started on those horseback riders! Dropping road apples all over the little bunnies and butterflies!
Why should the public be allowed on public lands at all?
-
and... since most federal land was federal before the slaves were freed (by the republicans) colored people shouldn't be allowed to use it?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
She (yes she) also believes that our hunter and fishermen in this country are the nations most valuable asset to wilderness and conservation.
lazs
Well, I guess her opinions should be null and void since she is a woman, right lazs?
-
where have I ever said that women shouldn't have opinions or hold jobs?
lazs
-
You've said they can have opinions, they just can't have them considered.
-
that is not what I have said hawker.
lazs
-
Lazs2,
Now you outta know by now, if they can't argue intellectually with your comment, they will find some other way to try and attack you.
By virtue of their going off on a tangent ("because she's a woman"), they have already surrendered the main arguement and are now busy trying to save face.
You win.
Well done.
dago
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/19_1088953111_kerrying-on.gif)